Romney — there’s no one who matches his experience and success — no one.
Palin-1
Romney strongly
No second choice
1 - Jindal or Sanford
2 - Pawlenty
Don’t know Palin.
Not Romney.
I think Palen would be a good choice, good conservative chick......
As a side note how about Ted Nugent as Secretary of Defense.... giggle
If Mitt is VP candidate I will CONSIDER voting mccain. MITT is the only choice for me. If Crist gets the nod I will vote for Bambi.
bttt
I’m okay with any of them BUT
Mitt is my guy. He’s the only one who will lead to me donating cash.
Without Mitt - my heart won’t be in it this time around. No signs, bumperstickers, calling talk radio etc.
McCain makes me depressed.
Hillary Clinton should be the veep choice. Beating Obama is the only thing that matters. McCain/Clinton will get the job done.
Someone else (write in)
Maybe Palin if she’s willing
I often read that people accused Fred of not having a fire in the belly [I’m talking about Freepers when I say that] BUT WHERE IS MCCAIN’S FIRE IN THE BELLY? I see no enthusiasm from Mumbles.
Jindal for me. He’s the up & coming new face of the party, imo.
Condi Rice
Thomas Sowell - a conservative economist - he would run intellectual rings around the entire Obama program, and can you just imagine the media having to hear it FROM HIM!!!!!
Romney. Solidly Support. He’d be an incredible addition to the ticket and we’d be lucky to have him.
On intensity... 1= solid support... 2= tepod/lukewarm... 3=hold your nose but still support
- Palin = 3
- Jindal = 2 (too young still)
- Romney = 1
- Sanford = 2
- Pawlenty = 3
Solidly support: Mitt Romney, Mark Sanford
Lukewarm support: Pawlenty, Palin, Jindal
No way in hell: Charlie Crist
forgot my write-in:
Haley Barbour
Jindal - 2 - I'm lukewarm on Bobby Jindal for most of the same reasons that I'm lukewarm on Sarah Palin. He's done very well in everything he's attempted. He's even shown executive ability as a bureaucrat in the Louisiana hospital system. However, he's still a guy who has been governor less than a year. Another weakness is that he's never done anything outside politics or government bureaucracy. Republicans don't elect presidents without some experience in the "real world." If he wanted to be president, he should have left politics after the 2003 defeat and spent ten years working in private enterprise. If he then returned and became a successful governor, he'd be a very strong candidate for president.
Romney - 2 - I like Mitt Romney. I don't agree with him on every issue. I don't like that he's taken a long time to come to good positions on some important issues. However, I accept that he spent much of his adult life not thinking in the ideological terms that I do, and not thinking in those terms can lead even good people to take bad positions. His business experience will be sorely needed in the next administration. He's the most proven executive being considered.
In spite of these things, I am only lukewarm. John McCain has had a bad history with religious conservatives, and he would do better if he could choose a VP candidate who automatically built bridges to those voters. Because Mr. Romney is a Mormon, he is not an automatic bridge to many of those voters. I hate the prejudice that makes people hold his religion against him, but hating that prejudice doesn't make the prejudice go away. McCain-Romney may be our strongest ticket, but I see big problems for that ticket. I don't know whether those two can motivate people for a big GOP turnout.
Sanford - 2+ - From what little I know about him, I could be very happy supporting Mark Sanford as VP, but he may be too much of an unknown to be a strong addition to the ticket. We should win South Carolina anyway, so he doesn't bring an important battleground state into the GOP column.
Pawlenty - 2 - Tim Pawlenty seems to be a "new Republican" cut from a mold that doesn't emphasize traditional conservative issues. In that sense, he matches what many people think the party needs, but he won't be good at building bridges to groups that already feel alienated by the McCain candidacy. He may help Mr. McCain swing some independents, but he won't be good at motivating the people that Karl Rove used to give George Bush two terms in the White House.
Others
Rick Santorum would do a good job of building bridges to conservative constituencies that don't trust Mr. McCain, but he would hurt McCain's efforts to appeal to independents. If he could guarantee a win in Pennsylvania, he might be a good choice.
Tom Ridge is another Pennsylvanian who must be considered because he's shown that he can win in Pennsylvania. He will hurt McCain among the conservatives but help with the independents. His executive experience is a positive.
Mike Huckabee would be another choice that would build bridges to the religious conservatives. His executive experience is nice also. His big weakness is immigration, but I suspect that most of us concerned about immigration will hold our noses and vote Republican in spite of being stabbed in the back by the likes of McCain and Huckabee. I don't think Mike Huckabee really helps us win important states, but maybe he helps a little bit in Missouri.
Our problem this year is that finding a good fit for John McCain is nearly impossible. He's offended many who would normally vote Republican but who hold principle over party. He has military experience, but he has no executive experience. He doesn't have a natural constituency within the core GOP voters, and many independents who like him will vote against him because of the war.
Bill
Barbour, Hunter or Pence.